[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4833112F.7020402@zytor.com>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 10:58:07 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [X86] Remove unnecessary code in 64bit CPU identification.
Dave Jones wrote:
> On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 07:46:57AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > Dave Jones wrote:
> > > There were no 64bit Transmeta CPUs made (and it'd be something of
> > > a surprise if they started any time soon). To the best of my knowledge,
> > > no CPU vendor cloned the 80860000 cpuid space claimed by Transmeta.
> > > By removing this code, we can also eliminate calling cpuid 0x80000007 twice.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
> >
> > I'd really like to avoid divergences between the 32-bit and 64-bit code
> > if they can be avoided at this point. These codes need to be unified,
> > not further split.
>
> Umm, the 32 bit code has the per-vendor stuff removed from setup.c, and factored
> out into per-vendor files in arch/x86/kernel/cpu/ Because the 64bit version
> doesn't do that (yet), my removal of this code actually gets us closer to unification.
> After my patch, neither of the setup.c files have the Transmeta bits :)
>
*Shrug* ... it seems like pointless churn to code that really needs to
die to me.
-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists